Riding home this evening via the coast route, going through the Waterman area, when a Ranger standing on the side of the shared path (couple of additional mates near him), holding a illuminated baton, requests me to 'slow down sir'. The conditions where fine, though dark as it was around 6:15pm and I was travelling at what I know was a safe speed. Both front and back light on, ringing my bell when overtaking, so anyone on the shared path can see and hear me, which is more than I can say for the pedesdrians on the shared path.

Is this the City of Stirling trying to introduce their so call local 20km local law, as if this continues (ie I'm requested to slow down when I am travelling at a safe speed), then they will need to mark every City of Stirling shared path with the speed limit, and provide me with a illuminated speedo so I know when I'm approaching their so called local 20km limit. I will then move back onto the road, where I know I will slow down the motorists on this stretch due to the number of medium strips in the middle of the road which prevents them from overtaking me.

that the west coast highway route? yeah I go on the road and try to push 30kph+ going north. It is too dangerous to be the PSP and I thought they didn't need to post the 20km speed because that is the speed on all PSP. its like driving in small residential streets around Perth, 50kph there is no sign for that.

Oh btw while I am here who was riding north from City Beach route on Wednesday evening 5ish? I felt someone draft off me so I tried to bolt 41kph+ at the smooth road bit between City Beach & Scarbrough and the guy over took me and lead for a bit and signaled for me to over take again but I didn't. Just want to say hi and it was fun I would of kept it up but not keen going 40kph+ around a bend into a PSP.

I was riding on the shared path at Waterman. I like to ride on my personally partially funded $2.7m shared path in Joondalup (I'm a rate payer hence I personaly partially funded it), which is just north of where I was instructed to 'Slow Down Sir'.

I was incorrect on the City of Stirling's local law of 20kmh, it is actually 10kmh. Taken from here

citywomble AKA Special Projects Support Engineer COS wrote:In the definitions, in common with the RTC 2000, a bicycle is included in the definition of a vehicle. Please note that riding a bicycle is only permitted on a road or path (not grassed areas) and that all vehicles are subject to a 10kph speed limit (Schedule 2 - Determinations, Part 2 -Applications, Section 2.2 (2)).

In regards to other shared paths outside the City of Stirling, I am unaware of any speed limits, though safety is important.

I did write of to the Minister of Local Government asking him to review the local law, but unfortuantly can't find his response.

In response to the comments made, and Roland in particular, I can provide some clarifications here:

Roland, it was not a Stirling Ranger but a Sn Sergeant from WA Police Traffic Division that requested you slow down. This was part of a joint exercise between City of Stirling and WA Police in response to many complaints regarding this and other sections of Shared Paths and resulted in many Cautions tonight.

Secondly, Austroads Design Guidance indicates the threshold for Shared Paths as 20kph and this is about the speed at which a cyclist would be able to respond to the unpredicable behavior of pedestrians and anyone entering the path from the concealed beach accesses of which there are 75 along this stretch and still be able to Give Way as legally obligated.

There has been some debate over the hazards posed by the medians on West Coast Drive and the jury is about 50/50 on whether they actually make the road safer. Hopefully further improvements can be made and a request for the installation of a bike lane and reduction in motor traffic lane to empower cyclists (and slow traffic speeds) is currently with state government agencies.

Hanzao, you do seem a very responsible cyclist with the right attitude to safety. The bend you refer to is an identified critical hazard for which a solution is being investigated as it is also a well frequented beach access. Sadly there is not, at present, a speed limit for shared paths but 20kph is a good start. By the way the coast route is not a Principal Shared Path (PSP) but a Recreational Shared Path (RSP) intended and suitable for recreational and family use only. Recommendations, that have been floated and will be part of the Bike Plan, for the MRWA administered PSPs (generally alongside freeways), is for the removal or segregation of pedestrians to enable a higher speed to be sustained (and signed) to meet the aspirations of fast commuters, however, that will require the cooperation of state agencies.

Finally, to Roland, this section of RSP is within the road reserve and covered by the Road Traffic Code 2000 and not Stirling Local Law, hence the enforcement by police. The link you referred to, and the 10kph speed limit within that local law, applies only to parks and reserves which would be enforceable by City Rangers. There are shared paths and part of this RSP which do traverse City land, such as at Trigg Island SLSC, and there is a speed signage (and cyclist dismantled control 'gate' which will be reinstated) at that location and potentially within the Scarb Beach area in future. On the plus side we do hope to provide higher funding and better promotion of cycling for all levels of cyclist within the City and wider metropolitan area.

I hope this has helped and confirm that this was only the first of similar joint operations with WA Police.

As for the proposed 10kph limit, joggers go faster than that. Are they gonna be pulled up?

For Rolandp, all the ministers in WA are pretty much useless. I have asked different ministers for local gov to do numerous things and they never do. Personally I don't think they do a damn thing except sit around twiddling their thumbs. The only person I found that was remotely helpful in the min for local gov office was a guy called Bob Thompson. He is the liaison between councils and state gov ministers. He is informative and sounds helpful but doesn't appear to have any power.

In relation to being asked to slow down by the boys in blue. We were asked that years ago when bike helmets were just about to become compulsory in Perth. We told the cops to catch us if they can and took off. They spent the next 4 hours trying to catch us as we zipped around Perth waiting for the new years fireworks. Straight after new year they trapped us in one of the malls and we got busted for not wearing a helmet

Kicked a black cat? Sounds more like ran over one, backed over it, hunted down its mother and did the same.

Colin_T wrote:Very informative citywomble. Now where does citywomble work?

Hi

To answer your question Colin, the City of Stirling.

On the subject of this particular path, it is disappointing that there are sections IIRC which have markings indicating that path users should give way to vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway, whereas the LAW requires vehicles to give way. Such confusing signage is stupid and dangerous in my view as it presents a misleading picture of the law and may result in misunderstandings at other locations.

In my view the relevant authority should ensure its engineering and design staff are properly trained in the law to ensure that infrastructure reflects the actual laws of this State.

For those interested the relevant sections of the Road Traffic Code 2000 as amended November 14, 2009 are Sections 57 and 58.

As to the actions of the Police Officer, I have no issues with him or her speaking to cyclists behaving recklessly but once again it seems that the Police Officer is ignoring the actual offenders and targeting responsible persons and ignoring the real and by far more serious issue yet again of deaths on the road. The statistics clearly show that the likelihood of a death of a pedestrian by a cyclist on a path are very low compared to the likelihood of a death on the road of both pedestrians and cyclists.

Where are the regular patrols the roads in this area by the WA Traffic Police? The roundabouts are frequently driven badly and dangerously along this section, yet the Police are missing in action from what I see on my rides.

My latest report of a clear breach of the Road Traffic Code 2000 further north on the coast this past week or so has gone un-actioned yet again. What is it going to take? My death? Another cyclists death? Nah, it will take 20+ deaths, but hey a complaint by a pedestrian will get instant attention. Go figure!

I've given up on the shared path on West Coast Drive. Normally the volume of pedestrian traffic makes the path unridable over 20km/h. I think that the road is a better option but I usually restrict myself to early mornings to avoid traffic. The road is wide enough for vehicles (including trucks) to pass but I've noticed both as a cyclist and a driver that many motorists panic and won't pass until there is a long stretch without a median. Most cyclists who use the road do the right thing and stay as far to the left as possible.

I believe the medians should and will remain due to the number of pedestrians that cross the road to access the path and the beaches.

20Kph is nothing. If they're going to impose low speed limits on PSPs or "bike paths" it will only serve to force faster cyclists onto the roads. I personally don't have a problem with this (fast vehicles should be on the roads IMHO), but I feel it flies in the face of the stated purpose of these paths - which is to give bikes a place to be apart from roads! Oh well. Given that heaps of bike paths go absolutely nowhere useful, I'm guessing it won't affect too many people!

*sigh*Max

One of the best things about bicycle commuting is that it can mitigate the displeasure of having to go to work. - BikeSnobNYCCycling is sometimes like bobbing for apples in a bucket full of dicks. - SydGuy

Thoglette wrote:Have the planners at Stirling had a look the traffic works carried out along the southern shore of the Swan in East Freo (around and upstream of The Left Bank)?

Hi

Are these recent works or are you referring to the existing "bicycle lanes"? If you are referring to the existing ones, the one on the southern side often gets covered in debris, plant matter, flooded etc at various points making it risky to use; I have been hit by a 4WD drifting into the northern one as as I was coming out of a slow down point and on group rides they are just plain useless. We always claim the lane along here. Oh there is also the issue of the lane on both sides at times running along side car parking areas. Nothing like an engineered killing zone (door zone).

Also west of the Left Bank are the slow down points which often cause agro with motorists for some silly reason. I am faster over them and it seems to create a need to "race" me for some stupid reason. Also they don't help with the Left Bank (pub) crowd ...

citywomble wrote: The link you referred to, and the 10kph speed limit within that local law, applies only to parks and reserves which would be enforceable by City Rangers.

Hi

I assume you are referring to the City of Stirling's Local Government Property Local Law 2009 and if that is correct, then the speed restriction actually applies to "local government property" according to Section 2.2(2) and hence this seems to be much broader than the suggested parks and reserves.

The relevant section I am referring to is section 2.2(2) which states:

A person must not drive a vehicle or allow a vehicle to be driven on local government property at a speed exceeding 10 kilometres per hour, or in such a manner as to cause danger, inconvenience or annoyance to any person.

Now this begs the question and I am getting a bit off-topic here, and I assuming that the car park at the City of Stirling offices on Cedric Street, Innaloo is local government property and hence why doesn't the City of Stirling impose and comply with its own speed limits in its own car park? There are warning signs for speed humps in the car park marked 20 km/h. Now that is double the 10 km/h speed limit imposed by the Council's own by-laws.

Does this mean that pedestrians and cyclists and other vulnerable users of this area do not warrant protection from motorists or is this just a simple case of hypocrisy or a Council not aware of its own laws?

Just curious.

RegardsAndrew

Last edited by Aushiker on Mon May 03, 2010 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

velocopedant wrote:I've given up on the shared path on West Coast Drive. Normally the volume of pedestrian traffic makes the path unridable over 20km/h. I think that the road is a better option but I usually restrict myself to early mornings to avoid traffic. The road is wide enough for vehicles (including trucks) to pass but I've noticed both as a cyclist and a driver that many motorists panic and won't pass until there is a long stretch without a median. Most cyclists who use the road do the right thing and stay as far to the left as possible.

Hi

I am pretty much the same as you, however, I still ride the path form just south of Scarborough through to the South Trigg car park as sticking to West Coast Drive through Scarborough is just not worth the risk for me. Particularly heading north from the Scarborough Beach Road intersection and I do at times get very frustrated with the stupidity and inconsiderate behaviour of some cyclists in this section. That said there also stupid pedestrians, particularly at Trigg Beach where surf boards are being carried.

Still it is only a short section and provides a recovery and I need it

Marty Moose wrote:Was riding home near scabs the other morning at about 6am and saw three ladies running with super flashes clipped to the rear of their shorts. As I passed said great idea they were cool

yeah but you weren't really looking at the lights tho, were you

Kicked a black cat? Sounds more like ran over one, backed over it, hunted down its mother and did the same.

citywomble wrote:I hope this has helped and confirm that this was only the first of similar joint operations with WA Police.

Jon, as City of Stirling cycling traffic engineer, please advise the forum when the next joint operation will take place, and board members from BTA and any other interested participants will come along and observe.

citywomble wrote:I hope this has helped and confirm that this was only the first of similar joint operations with WA Police.

Jon, as City of Stirling cycling traffic engineer, please advise the forum when the next joint operation will take place, and board members from BTA and any other interested participants will come along and observe.

Hi

Yes please and I will come along armed with a copy of the Act for some eh education

I think the reason these kinds of operations get so many objections is that it doesn't feel like the cyclists are being given any decent alternatives. The options are on the 'shared' road or on the 'shared' path. Pedestrians are obviously given precedence on the shared paths, both in the (completely ridiculous and unworkable laws that mean the cyclist is at fault no matter how stupidly the pedestrian is behaving). Drivers are given precedence on the road, not due to the law, but by the non-existent enforcement of laws supposed to protect cyclists. Similarly, there is a near constant braying in the media and by certain councillors about how the bikes don't belong anywhere. In that kind of environment, it's unsurprising that people complain.

fixed wrote: Jon, as City of Stirling cycling traffic engineer, please advise the forum when the next joint operation will take place, and board members from BTA and any other interested participants will come along and observe.

HiYes please and I will come along armed with a copy of the Act for some eh education Andrew

but don't edumacate them too much, coz them govment fellas don't like bein shown up for their stupidity

Kicked a black cat? Sounds more like ran over one, backed over it, hunted down its mother and did the same.

fixed wrote: Jon, as City of Stirling cycling traffic engineer, please advise the forum when the next joint operation will take place, and board members from BTA and any other interested participants will come along and observe.

HiYes please and I will come along armed with a copy of the Act for some eh education Andrew

but don't edumacate them too much, coz them govment fellas don't like bein shown up for their stupidity

wintal wrote:I think the reason these kinds of operations get so many objections is that it doesn't feel like the cyclists are being given any decent alternatives. The options are on the 'shared' road or on the 'shared' path. Pedestrians are obviously given precedence on the shared paths, both in the (completely ridiculous and unworkable laws that mean the cyclist is at fault no matter how stupidly the pedestrian is behaving). Drivers are given precedence on the road, not due to the law, but by the non-existent enforcement of laws supposed to protect cyclists. Similarly, there is a near constant braying in the media and by certain councillors about how the bikes don't belong anywhere. In that kind of environment, it's unsurprising that people complain.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.